Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Taxation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Greenburgh board closes hearing on volunteer firefighter tax-exemption changes after residents raise fairness concerns
Summary
At a public hearing on a proposed amendment to Chapter 440 of the town code, residents and board members debated whether the proposed property-tax exemption for volunteer firefighters and ambulance corps members is equitable; the board closed the hearing and left the record open for seven days.
The Town of Greenburgh opened a public hearing on May 14 to consider a proposed amendment to Chapter 440 of the town code that would refine eligibility for property-tax exemptions for volunteer firefighters and volunteer ambulance corps members. Town staff said the updated draft clarifies how the 10% service requirement will be calculated and limits qualifying service to calls occurring within the town.
Residents pressed the board about fairness and the practical effect of the change. “Frankly, I don't understand the purpose of this law,” said Hal Sammis, who argued the exemption as drafted favors homeowners of higher‑valued properties and provides little or no benefit to renters or lower‑valued homes. Sammis urged either a fixed-rate benefit or a home‑rule revision to make the program less dependent on property value.
The town assessor explained administrative timing and alternatives during the hearing. “The new assessed values for 2025 will be published on June 1,” the assessor said, and noted that a $200 state income‑tax credit is available to those who cannot or do not take the property exemption. The assessor also described multi‑jurisdictional complexity — villages, school districts and the county have each taken differing positions — that affects the overall dollar impact residents see on their bills.
A council member who addressed the crowd said village adoption often produces a larger effect for volunteers living in villages because village tax shares are larger than the town share. “It would be much more impactful if the villages decide to pass that part of the legislation,” a council member said, urging residents to consider both town and village actions.
After more than an hour of testimony and back‑and‑forth with staff, the board voted to close the public hearing and leave the record open for seven days for written submissions. The motion to close the hearing was made, seconded, and carried by voice vote.
Next steps: the record will remain open seven days; the board indicated it expects to take further action after reviewing written comments and any additional staff recommendations.
